UGC vs State Government

Six state universities in Tamil Nadu have been without Vice Chancellors (VCs) for several months to over a year. The delay in appointing new VCs is due to a disagreement between the Governor (acting as the ex-officio Chancellor) and the Tamil Nadu State Government regarding the composition of the search committee that selects VCs.

The Core Disagreement

• Governor’s Stance: The Governor insists that a nominee from the University Grants Commission (UGC) must be included in the VC search committee. This is based on the UGC Regulations, 2018, which mandate such a nomination.
• State Government’s Stance: The Tamil Nadu government argues that the search committee should follow the procedures outlined in the State University Acts. These Acts typically only require nominees from the Chancellor, the syndicate (a university body), and the senate, excluding the UGC.
• The State government opposes UGC involvement, fearing it undermines the autonomy of state universities.

Legal Complications

The situation is complicated by conflicting Supreme Court rulings:

• One set of rulings supports the Governor’s view, stating that UGC regulations are mandatory and can override State laws in case of conflict.
• Another set of rulings backs the State government’s position, saying UGC regulations are advisory and cannot override State laws unless adopted by the State.

This confusion has made it difficult to resolve the issue.

Constitutional Issue: Can UGC Regulations Override State Laws?

• The core legal issue revolves around whether the UGC regulations, which are subordinate legislation (rules created under a central law), can override State laws (plenary laws passed by the State legislature). This issue is tied to Centre-State relations.
  • Article 254(1) of the Indian Constitution addresses situations where Central laws conflict with State laws. It says that if a State law conflicts with a Central law, the Central law will prevail. However, this rule applies to plenary laws (full laws passed by Parliament or State legislatures) and not to subordinate legislation (like UGC regulations).
• Key Legal Precedents: The Supreme Court has ruled in previous cases that subordinate legislation, such as UGC regulations, cannot override plenary State laws. The UGC can only issue advisory regulations for universities; it cannot enforce them on State universities unless the State adopts them.

Conflicting Supreme Court Rulings

There have been some conflicting rulings by the Supreme Court:

• In some cases, the Court has ruled that UGC regulations should be followed by State universities, arguing that they are mandatory once laid before Parliament.
• In other cases, the Court has stated that UGC regulations are not mandatory for State universities unless the State adopts them.

This inconsistency in rulings has created confusion about the applicability of UGC regulations to State universities.

UGC’s Overreach

• The UGC’s regulations about Vice Chancellor appointments are seen as overreach. The UGC Act, 1956 does not specifically deal with the appointment of VCs.
• The enactment of the UGC Act 1956 is traced to Entry 66 of the Union list. Section 26 of this Act allows UGC to make regulations. 
  • Union list is one of the three lists on the 7th schedule of the Constitution. State list and Concurrent list are the other two.
  • According to Article 246, the central government has exclusive powers to make laws on the subjects in the Union list, while the state government can make laws on subjects in the State list.
  • As for the Concurrent list, both central and state governments can enact laws listed under it. But if there is a conflict between the laws, the central law will override the state law.
• The UGC’s power is mainly advisory, and its regulations are meant to guide, not mandate.
• However, the UGC’s insistence on including a nominee in the search committee reflects a shift towards more administrative control over universities, which the Tamil Nadu government sees as an erosion of autonomy.

What Needs to Happen Next?

To resolve this issue, the matter needs to be clarified by the Supreme Court. The Court must decide:

• That UGC regulations are advisory for State universities unless adopted by the State.
• That Article 254(1) of the Constitution applies only to conflicts between plenary laws, not subordinate legislation.
• That UGC regulations do not automatically become part of the UGC Act just by being laid before Parliament.